so we know britain was first settled by celtic tribes...then Romans came, they drove celtics to wales and scotland, and built the famous hadrian's wall...when Roman Empire collapsed, Anglon-Saxons invaded and ruled England for several centureis...until William the Conqueror successfully invaded and proclaimed himself the King of England...then the Hundreds' years war began, because the king of England was norman, he was from france so he claimed he is the rightful ruler of france.my questions is: when the war ended, what happened to the normans? were they integrated to the anglo-saxons or did they leave england? when did the currenty dynasty begin(windsor)? is queen elizebath anglo-saxon, norman or german? i remember the house name was used to be stugart?

>>when the war ended, what happened to the normans? were they integrated to the anglo-saxons or did they leave england? when did the currenty dynasty begin(windsor)? is queen elizebath anglo-saxon, norman or german? i remember the house name was used to be stugart?<<


By the time the Hundred Years War started the Norman ruling class no longer existed. Englands ruling class was a mixture of English and Norman families who had intermarried. Thanks largely to Edward I, the nobility now spoke English , albeit with added French words this helped them be accepeted by the English people. So the Normans didnt leave because they were no longer Norman, they saw themselves as English.


The current Royal family is German. Saxe-Coburg IIRC.

England hasnt been ruled by an English King(or Queen) since 1066.



"Garlic......and bread?? Garlic bread??"

We are all mongrels after a fashion, Celts, Anglo Saxons, Normans non of them are native to the British Isles and most people have a little bit of everything in them. The Normans BTW where only loosely French, they where Vikings who settled in Normandy.

There where also influxes of Flemish and French Huguenots fleeing religious persecution in Europe, in short non of us are aboriginal British.

Among other evils which being unarmed brings you it causes you to be despised - Niccolo Machiavelli

http://www.savethebritishforces.org.uk

Got a bit of norse in us aswell i'd gather...seeing all the raping the Vikings did on our coasts...

Well I disagree with Chongli, although the normans adopted an english identity they ve never truely assimilated. Still nowadays there is a class division in the english society, the higher class are usually derived from the normans.

We are all mongrels after a fashion, Celts, Anglo Saxons, Normans non of them are native to the British Isles and most people have a little bit of everything in them. The Normans BTW where only loosely French, they where Vikings who settled in Normandy

Nope you get it all wrong. Normans weren't norse but full blooded frenchmen. This has been discussed over and over.

1. On the Tapestry of Bayeux, their no reference to the normans but only yo the Franci (aka Frank or French)

2. The normans adopted the same hair style as the everywhere else in France, that why the Anglo-saxon though they were an army of priest.

3. In the anglo-saxon chronicle, the only reference to the norsemen, are those of the viking. The normans however are referred to as Franci(french) or astonishingly as romans. The reason for that France was the last roman stronghold before it felt to the Franks.

4. Only a fraction of viking, most of them single male who settled normandy were actually viking. Unlike what happened in England, where the normans took power from anglo-saxon hands, the vikings were forced to co-exist with the original population. The velvets have enormous power in normandy and the readily married with the viking. 150 years later, the viking were just a myth.

5. The vast army of the normans were came actually from ile-de-France

>>in short non of us are aboriginal British.<<

Well that maybe true, but the same could be said of most nations of the world. The English are no more Mongrel than the French, Germans or Italians.



>>Well I disagree with Chongli, although the normans adopted an english identity they ve never truely assimilated. Still nowadays there is a class division in the english society, the higher class are usually derived from the normans.<<

The Hundred Years Wars helped speed up Norman assimilation but the Norman and English ruling familes had been intermarrying since the conquest began. So though the Normans never mixed with the majority of the English people they did with the leading English families they were replacing so by the time fighting started the Anglo-Norman ruling class was exactly that.


The current Upper class would be a mixture of English, Germans and Normans.

Thanks largely to the Hanoverians.



Also the Norman army at the battle of Hastings was clearly divided into three groups; Bretons, Frenchmen and Norman.




"Garlic......and bread?? Garlic bread??"

Actualy as Chongli said the "upper classes" are if anything predomintly Hanoverian, the Normans where assimalated rather rapidly. Norman french did remain the language of the ruleing classes for a while but this also changed.

And the Normans where only loosely French

In 911, a group of Scandinavian raiders under the leadership of Rollo sailed up the Seine and forced the French king to cede French territory. The price the king asked was that Rollo become a subject of the king and swear loyalty. This he did, and the Norsemen settled a very small area in the north of France. Rollo, however, considered himself to be an independent ruler and aggressively set about increasing the territory under his control. This constant expansion of territory would become the hallmark of the Norman experience in history.

   Normandy was in name a duchy of France, but the Norman dukes ruled the area as if it were an independent kingdom with little interference from the French king. By the eleventh century, the duchy of Normandy had become one of the most powerful regions in western Europe. There were, however, even more promising times ahead—in 1066, the Norman duke, William the Bastard, conquered the English forces of Harold Godwinson and became king of England. Norman culture and political structure would cross the channel and dramatically change English culture and history.

   The Scandinavians who settled Normandy very quickly adopted the religion, customs, and language of the surrounding French populations. Rollo converted to Catholicism, but the adoption of French culture and language did not immediately alter the social structure of the Norman lords. From 911 until 980, the history of the Normans is one of constant blood-feuds and territorial battles, a history similar to that played out in early Scandinavia, the Danelaw in England, and Iceland.

   Around 980, however, the Normans began to develop a unique set of institutions that would catapult them into the front-rank of European power and cultural influence. The most significant event in early Norman history was the placing of Hugh Capet on the throne of France—the Capetians only gained the throne through the help of the Normans and in gratitude, they allowed the Normans to operate independently.

   Once free from monarchical intrusion, the Norman dukes began to solidify an administrative system over their territories. This system became the model for subsequent medieval government: the feudal system. The Normans faced sporadic resistance from nobility within their domains. To counter this nobility, the Norman lords made clergy, who were largely drawn from the nobility, as their vassals since the monastic and church lands were on lands owned by the duke. All the knights resident on church and monastic lands the dukes forced into military loyalty. They used this core of vassals and knights to overcome the nobility which were forced to enter into feudal obligations to the duke.

   The word, "feudal," comes from the word, "feud." A feudal obligation, then, was essentially built off of clan or tribal protection. For the early tribal Scandinavians, the only way to enforce law was through clan protetction and blood-feuds. Should a crime be committed against a member of the clan, it was the job of the entire clan to either seek retribution or enforce a penalty. It was on this ground that the dukes of Noramndy built their feudal system. Under this system, lay nobility were allowed to control a certain amount of territory. They were required, however, to enter into oaths to the duke; these oaths required their military service should the duke require it.

   The feudal system allowed the Norman dukes to control a vast amount of territory independently of the Capetian kings. It gave the dukes large military resources guaranteed through a network of loyalties. From Normandy, the feudal system spread rapidly first to Italy and then France—with Duke William II, the Bastard, this new and powerful form of government would cross the channel to England.

Among other evils which being unarmed brings you it causes you to be despised - Niccolo Machiavelli

http://www.savethebritishforces.org.uk

In 911, a group of Scandinavian raiders under the leadership of Rollo sailed up the Seine and forced the French king to cede French territory. The price the king asked was that Rollo become a subject of the king and swear loyalty. This he did, and the Norsemen settled a very small area in the north of France. Rollo, however, considered himself to be an independent ruler and aggressively set about increasing the territory under his control. This constant expansion of territory would become the hallmark of the Norman experience in history.


Normandy was in name a duchy of France, but the Norman dukes ruled the area as if it were an independent kingdom with little interference from the French king. By the eleventh century, the duchy of Normandy had become one of the most powerful regions in western Europe. There were, however, even more promising times ahead—in 1066, the Norman duke, William the Bastard, conquered the English forces of Harold Godwinson and became king of England. Norman culture and political structure would cross the channel and dramatically change English culture and history

Normandy was a duchy of the kingdom of France. The normans were culturally and racially(I mean similar to the original norman population, normandy was very celtic contrary to Frankish ile-de-France) french with a small viking input. Yes the viking were given the land after they were defeated by the Franks at Charte. But most of those vikings were actually single men, they readily married into the vast gallic population. Their children would easily adopt their mother language. Norman french is actually langue d'oil, the language spoken even before the arrival of the viking and the viking had no influence whathesoever on the language. Basically after 150 years, there wasn't any viking blood in any one of the invaders, certainly William wasn't a viking but as french as anyone else. Her mother was Arlette, the tanner(100%) french and his father the duke(I'll put him 75% french) who was more french than scandinavian. All the viking did was founding the duchy, that where their role stopped. The normans didn't fight like the viking but like the Franks, they didn't talk like them, they have names that are more french than french (with names like Platagenet, Blois and Rochefort you can only be french) and they built like us, same law and even same hair cut. so who are they? THe English themselves called them the french, and they never stopped calling them french untill the 100 year wars. One thing you forget also, the normans didn't initially married anglo-saxons but people from the continents. Further many french warriors went along with the normans and they were given land in england in exchange of military service.

The norman in England initially has a system of apartheid in England, where they separate anglo-saxon from normans. The normans initially married the french from either normandy or aquittaine (e.g Lion heart mother was from Aquittaine and the man couldn't speak a word of English plus decided to be buried in Bordeaux.)

The french word joli= beautiful is said to originate from the vikings in Normandy so is the words babord and tribord from the scandinavian words of babord and styrbord.
Crabbe and homard is also viking vocabulary.
In swedish = crabba and hummer.

They made a small inpact atleast.

The Anglo-Normans and the Anglo-Norman army.


-This led quickly to the establishment of an Anglo-Norman army made up of Norman horsemen of noble blood, Saxon infantrymen often of equally noble blood, assimilated English freemen as rank-and-file, and foreign mercenaries and adventurers from other parts of the Continent. Note that the Anglo-Saxon cniht was adopted instead of the French chevalier, reflecting the Anglicization of the younger Norman aristocracy -- who also adopted such Saxon styles as long hair and moustaches, upsetting the older generation.-


-Whatever the level of dispute, over time, the two populations largely intermarried and merged, combining languages and traditions. Normans began to identify themselves as Anglo-Norman; indeed, Anglo-Norman French was considerably distinct from the "Parisian French",Eventually, even this distinction largely disappeared in the course of the Hundred years war-



"Garlic......and bread?? Garlic bread??"

I'm not a specialist of the subject but don't have the so called "Normands" have 1/4 of Bretons allies and 1/4 Flandern or another northen province ally in their army at Hasting?
I'm not sure of the 1/2 allies proportion (may be it was 1/8 or 1/5 don't remember) but i know for sure than most allies knight fighting at Hasting were granted land in England and made a part of the "Normands" people who take root in Great Britain.

I'm not a specialist of the subject but don't have the so called "Normands" have 1/4 of Bretons allies and 1/4 Flandern or another northen province ally in their army at Hasting?
I'm not sure of the 1/2 allies proportion (may be it was 1/8 or 1/5 don't remember) but i know for sure than most allies knight fighting at Hasting were granted land in England and made a part of the "Normands" people who take root in Great Britain

Actually at the time Breton wasn't considered as french. But the distinction between Franks(I'll call french from ile-de-France as Frank to avoid confusion) and normans was impossible to make. For instance in the book from club to cannon. It mentioned 2 english knights (certainly noble of the highest order because anglo-saxons army was an infantry force unlike the normans) facing one Frank Chevalier( a noble man also as all knights are) who was protecting the flank of the normans. THat knight attacked the first English knight with a lance, the lance pierced the english knight from front to back and broke when he fell. He engaged the other knight with his mace and smashed the English knight skull. The only difference btw Franks and normans is that one used mace(generally speaking) as side arms the other use sword. Apparently both used the exact same clothes, but the Normans did like the fine brobery on English clothes, they took many back to normandy. Later I'll agree with Chongli the Anglo-normand (not to confuse with proper normand) adopted many aspects of the Anglo-saxons. But on the other hand the anglo-saxons also underwent major changes, for instance nearly all letter words of 2 or more syllable in the english languages are from french origins. Plus the english architecture became basically became like french architecture but adopted to their reality and environment. The normans built many keep and castles to control anglo-saxons rebellion.

>>It mentioned 2 english knights (certainly noble of the highest order because anglo-saxons army was an infantry force unlike the normans) facing one Frank Chevalier( a noble man also as all knights are) who was protecting the flank of the normans. THat knight attacked the first English knight with a lance, the lance pierced the english knight from front to back and broke when he fell. He engaged the other knight with his mace and smashed the English knight skull.<,

Whilst i agree that the Normans did have a considerble affect on English society thats quite a story. I know you read it in a book but if you have any sources i wouldnt mind seeing them. Mainly because all the English nobility at Hastings aswell as the Housecarles and Fyrd fought on foot. If such encounter did occur then its more than likely the English horsemen were not of Noble or any worthy blood.



"Garlic......and bread?? Garlic bread??"

Whilst i agree that the Normans did have a considerble affect on English society thats quite a story. I know you read it in a book but if you have any sources i wouldnt mind seeing them. Mainly because all the English nobility at Hastings aswell as the Housecarles and Fyrd fought on foot. If such encounter did occur then its more than likely the English horsemen were not of Noble or any worthy blood

Hang on, I'll try to find and scan the page.

"Actually at the time Breton wasn't considered as french. But the distinction between Franks(I'll call french from ile-de-France as Frank to avoid confusion) and normans was impossible to make."

I wasn't implying that the Breton were french. Just adding to the topic about the "normands" in England past Hasting.

In fact out of Northern France, South and west Lorraine, not that much can be considered "french" in the modern sens. South France was more "Occitane" culture than "Frank" one and culturally you should style distinct at least 4 to 5 main "french" culture in what would became modern France (i left out Bretons, Basques and other culture not french at core).

I would agrea with you thoug, the Normand were french. They were as close to the "Ile de France" people than the rest of northern France territory and much more than the people of Bourgogne or Auvergne not speaking about South part of France...

Look, all these petty differences (that were mere nomadic tribes) mean **** today. English are known as Anglo-Saxons, that in itself a merger. British is merger of Norman, Anglo-Saxon, Scot, Welsh, Celt, Viking and what not.
So, point of the matter is, tribes (cause that's what they were) didn't give two hoots about 'nation' and could have lived wherever they wanted, you cannot say that these guys are a French tribe, those guys are English, because overall, the diversity within Europe isn't that vast in immediate areas, so you will have a lot of grey areas.

http://india_resource.tripod.com/hist-2nation.html

Look, all these petty differences (that were mere nomadic tribes) mean **** today. English are known as Anglo-Saxons, that in itself a merger. British is merger of Norman, Anglo-Saxon, Scot, Welsh, Celt, Viking and what not.
So, point of the matter is, tribes (cause that's what they were) didn't give two hoots about 'nation' and could have lived wherever they wanted, you cannot say that these guys are a French tribe, those guys are English, because overall, the diversity within Europe isn't that vast in immediate areas, so you will have a lot of grey areas.

God what the hell this guy is talking about. Normans aren't a tribe but people of a duchy in the kingdom of France. They arent even a race, but more of a mixture of people of celtic, germanic, romans and scandinavian decent(however much aspect is put on the scandinavian because they founded the duchy but their small number were rapidly assimilated in the vast population, their true influence can be debated). In the anglo-saxons chronicle, the only norman were the proper viking. The Norman from normandy were referred to as Franci(french or franks), same thing on the tapestry of bayeux. These are the only proper source from that time, anything else is english historians deforming history.

At that time, the anglo-saxon wasn't a tribe but a monarchy under a proper king, some said it was a pretty free society and advance, some said it was backward and primitive, it is open to controvesy. The age of the great migration was other and tribalism was almost inexistent in europe. It was the feudal age. Normans are english, you must be out of your fvcking mind. The vast majority of normans decendents are french, and a small number migrate to italy and England to form independent kingdom. The normans couldn't reach their highest in France because of Frankish dominance. But they managed to dominate england and southern Italy for a while.



On the tapestry it says : "Here died in battle English (Angli) and french (Franci)"
Clearly the normans is exactly like any warrior from France, same shield style, fight with lance and on horse. Normans are shaved and english have beard and long hair. the tapestry is a rather accurate source depicting the battle of hasting. It was ordered in 1077 from an english broidery shop.